Today's Order of Business is items 1, 2, 3 and 8, motion 11. Item 1 is to be taken without debate. The proceedings on all Stages of item 2, if not previously concluded, shall conclude at 2 p.m. The contributions of spokespersons on item 2 shall not exceed 15 minutes and other Senators shall have ten minutes. The Second Stage of item 3 will be taken at 3 p.m. with the contributions of spokespersons not to exceed 20 minutes and those of other Senators 15 minutes. Item 8, motion 11, shall be taken at 6 p.m. and the proceedings on item 3, if not previously concluded, shall resume at 8 p.m. There will be a sos from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Order of Business.
Will the Leader allow 30 minutes for speakers on item 3? We agree with the time arrangements for item 2. We agree with the Order of Business otherwise, although Senator Cosgrave may wish to propose an amendment on another matter.
At the climate conference in Japan yesterday there was a debate on greenhouse gas emissions. The Minister for the Environment and Local Government has said that levels of emissions in Ireland in 2010 could be 55 per cent higher than 1990 levels. In view of the seriousness of this matter, will the Leader arrange for the Minister to come to the House to inform Members of the controls that will be put in place to lower the levels of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere?
Last week I raised the issue of the all-party committee on the Constitution and I will return to that issue this week as I am under pressure from my colleagues.
Today is the fiftieth anniversary of the UN Declaration of Human Rights and it would be appropriate to have a debate on the related area of cultural rights, not least to discuss the position of travellers, immigrants and refugees.
The OECD is to publish today a report on education in Europe which will underline pertinent facts about Irish education which we should discuss. The Leader has given a commitment that on the first sitting day after the recess there will be a debate on literacy. Perhaps we might discuss these related matters at that time.
Earlier in the session I requested a debate on the taxi service in the greater Dublin area. This is not an isolated or narrow issue in national terms but has security and other implications. I understand a report on the taxi service in the greater Dublin area is due to be published shortly and the House should take an interest in it. It will be the model for other urban areas.
I compliment the Leader on his initiative in having four Bills introduced in the Seanad this week. I am sure it is a record; perhaps he will contact the Guinness Book of Records. We seem to be playing musical chairs with regard to the time arrangements for speakers. Yesterday the Leader proposed 30 minutes for spokespersons. Today he is proposing 15 minutes for spokespersons for one Bill and 20 minutes for another. The leader of Fine Gael in the House is proposing 30 minutes. I suggest we allow 20 minutes for both Bills and that this be taken as a rule of thumb.
Yesterday I raised with the Leader the unsatisfactory procedure whereby all Stages of a Bill are taken on the same day, something the Leader is again proposing to do. It is not satisfactory to begin discussing a Bill after the Order of Business at 11.15 a.m. and to conclude all Stages by 2 p.m.
Two months ago the House passed legislation establishing a tribunal to examine planning irregularities which was due to make an interim report by Christmas. However, according to the newspapers, a wrangle has been going on regarding lawyers' fees and the Minister for Finance, the Attorney General and the chairman of the tribunal have had to come together to work out a compromise formula. It is unseemly that a body set up to examine a particular issue is held back from its work for an extended period for financial reasons. It is almost as though we need to establish a tribunal to examine the legal fees for other tribunals. Because of this and other rumours in relation to delays in setting up the tribunal, will the Leader ask the Minister for Finance to make a statement about why the tribunal has not been operating at a time when it should have presented its first interim report to the House?
I concur with Senator O'Toole in asking for a debate on the OECD report, which contains startling facts about Ireland in relation to other countries. It would be worthwhile if the report could be debated alongside a debate on literacy.
Yesterday morning I asked the House if it would consider a debate on radon gases. The Leader, not realising that it is a different substance, the consequences of which are widely known, included radon with other forms of radiation. In a few months a report on radon radiation throughout Ireland will be published. It affects many households, particularly in the west of Ireland and areas of high limestone content, and has consequences for people in terms of housing costs, including the costs of new housing. It is critical that we have a debate on this matter.
I am disappointed and surprised that the Leader has not responded to my repeated attempts last week and yesterday to raise the Flood tribunal and the C case. I am beginning to think that some sort of cover-up is operating and I respectfully suggest that this is the last thing the country needs in view of the important matters which the Taoiseach raised in both Houses regarding the establishment of the tribunal. The problem is not only about legal fees. I would like everything to be fully revealed, including details of all correspondence and communications covering the provision of expertise, including specialist staff, and the role of the Garda, who have been previously involved in investigating this matter. The tribunal cannot function without these being in place.
We cannot have a debate on the matter. Has the Senator a question for the Leader?
We should have the precise detail as to why everything is not in place. Regarding the C case, were the two eminent counsel appointed by the Attorney General to protect the life of the unborn not prepared to appeal the decision of the High Court? In the more likely event that they were prepared to do their job fully, were their instructions withdrawn or were they dismissed or sacked?
Will the Leader arrange a debate on telephone charges? I am not sure which Minister should come to the House to explain why we have such high telephone costs. Big international companies are anxious to enter the market to share the profits of the telephone service at the same time as small businesspeople are paying exorbitant rates for their calls. Half of the business people in Ireland are based in Dublin. The other half are finding it difficult to sustain themselves and to pay for trunk calls while those in Dublin are paying for local calls. I have to pay international rates for a telephone call from Lifford to Strabane, a distance of half a mile. This House has a contribution to make on this matter and I ask the Leader to bring the appropriate Minister before the House for a debate. We are a small island and our goal should be to ensure that every call within Ireland is a local call. Rather than seeing international companies entering the market and reaping the benefits of the high rates which have been in place for years and which established a very credible business for Telecom Éireann, we should demand local call rates for the entire island.
The Senator is shedding crocodile tears. Market forces are at work. The Senator did not want to hear about it ten years ago.
I do not take kindly to interruptions from Independent Members who have no opinion on anything.
In view of the announcement by the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to set up of an independent body to examine the rural rail network in order to identify areas where there are serious defects and which will report within six months, I ask the Leader to bring the Minister to the House to indicate the Government's fundamental support for this important element of our infrastructure. In light of what has happened in the west and south in relation to the rail network, it is important that the Government gives some indication of its financial support for the longterm development of the network.
Senator Costello expressed his view regarding the allocation of time for today's business. I understand that item 2 is a Bill with two sections and that item 3 is a Bill with 41 sections. We will be insisting on 30 minutes for spokespersons and, if necessary, will call for a vote on the matter. We are not comparing like with like. Senator Costello has had a long association with the subject of the Bill under item 2, and I am sure the House will have no difficulty in facilitating him if he wants more time.
I move: "That statements on the facilities for the Leas-Chathaoirleach and other Senators not exceeding 30 minutes be taken before item 1." It is with reluctance that I propose this amendment to the Order of Business. As Members know, I am reasonable and not prone to being over aggressive. However, since 18 September I have been allocated an office in the College of Art while I share a secretary with two others in Kildare House. The telephone remains unanswered when I am meeting with the Leader, the Whip and Senators Callanan and Ormonde in the College of Art. This is unfair to me as an officer of the House who substitutes for the Cathaoirleach if he is unavailable. It is also unfair in view of the facilities available to Members of the other House. It appears that certain Deputies can ring the Government Chief Whip and he comes running to them. They do not even have to go to him. The purpose of the amendment is to allow the House discuss this matter.
Mr. Cregan
I second the amendment.
I support Senator O'Toole's call for a debate on taxi services in Dublin city. I considered raising this matter because I received complaints from people in my area who travelled to Dublin by train and waited almost an hour in a queue at Heuston Station for a taxi. The position is the same at taxi ranks in the city centre when people want to travel to the station in the evening. It is most unfair and there is a need for extra taxis in Dublin city centre to ensure the service is efficient.
Will the Leader pass on the congratulations of many Members of the House to the President on her act of ecumenical worship in Christchurch Cathedral last weekend? It was deeply appreciated by members of the Church of Ireland and many other people. It showed a forward looking attitude and I welcome that on the part of the President.
Last week I asked the Leader about the current state of play of the Litter Bill. Does the Leader have a report on this matter? The position is appalling in Dublin city in the run up to Christmas. The days for rubbish collection have been changed and a mass of rubbish is blowing around several streets, including my own, in the centre of the city. This is unacceptable and appalling in a capital city. Cars drive over the rubbish, litter is spewed over pavements and bags of rubbish are left out for several days. The position is intolerable. If the House is serious about its role, it should monitor the implementation of laws. Dublin Corporation is responsible on this occasion, not only the citizens of Dublin.
Will the Leader clarify the position regarding the duration of contributions on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons Bill? Although it is extremely important legislation and many Members, including myself, wish to contribute to the debate, I understand it is a technical Bill relating to a specific aspect. Since all Stages are due to conclude by 2 p.m., will the Leader consider altering the time available for contributions? They should not be the usual length of speeches on legislation. This would allow as many Members as possible take part in the debate. I understand 20 minutes for opening speakers and 15 minutes for other contributors has been suggested. Perhaps this could be reduced to 15 minutes for opening remarks and ten minutes for other speakers.
I support Senator Mooney's suggestion on the time arrangements. I also support Senator Burke's call for statements on the environmental summit in Japan. The Leader indicated yesterday that he is agreeable to statements on the environment generally and such a debate could include this matter. The role of the European Union regarding the control of the emission of greenhouse gases, and particularly the reluctance of America to implement strict measures in that respect, must be looked at critically. Another aspect is enforcement. The Earth Summit should be included in statements on the environment, which the Leader agreed to arrange soon after Christmas.
I support Senator Cosgrave's amendment to the Order of Business for a discussion on Members' facilities. I am strongly of the view that if Members do not uphold the dignity and seriousness of the role we are expected to play, we cannot expect others to do so. Those of us who were in the Seanad previously know it takes little to realise how quickly the relevance of the House can be questioned by those who are not aware of its important function in our bicameral Parliament. I plead with the Leader to allow a serious discussion on this matter.
I share my office with a secretary and another Senator. My secretary serves four Senators, which means four telephones are ringing all day. The only fax for our corridor is five feet from my desk. It is either pumping out faxes for half a dozen people or material is being fed into it. We would not tolerate from our youngest children in their play spaces at home the chaos, untidiness and lack of discipline in terms of how the system is organised.
I plead with the Cathaoirleach, who understands the functioning and seriousness of the work of the House, on this matter. For months Members have pleaded through the normal channels for a resolution of this problem. I and other Members take their work seriously. We must be prepared to address this problem instantly because four months have passed since Members were elected. What can we do to make people realise it is impossible for Members to serve the House, contribute to debates and carry out the necessary research on important legislation without basic facilities? We do not want luxuries, only a clean area with fresh air in our rooms and places where secretaries can function and are not frazzled.
I have allowed the Senator much latitude but we cannot debate the matter in detail now.
I am underlining and underscoring the importance of my colleague Senator Cosgrave's request to the Leader of the House on behalf of all Members.
I understand that.
Mr. Cregan
Who is representing Ireland at the international conference in Japan?
I am happy to agree to the proposal for contributions of 20 minutes rather than 30 minutes on item 3.
Thirty minutes instead of 20 minutes.
That is fine. Regarding Senator Costello's point, the Bill is short and contains only two sections. I made the original proposal of 15 minutes and ten minutes for speakers to allow as many Members as possible contribute to the debate.
Regarding the calls of Senators Burke, Dardis, Cregan and Coogan for statements on the Earth Summit and their concerns about this matter, I will make time available for such a debate at the earliest possible opportunity.
In relation to Senator O'Toole's concern about Independents on the all-party committee on the Constitution, I am waiting for an indication on this matter. I hope to have information for him by the end of this week.
Senator O'Toole and Senator Coogan mentioned the OECD report and called for a debate on literacy. As I assured the House previously, such a debate will take place on the first day the House sits in the next session.
Senator Rory Kiely and Senator O'Toole raised their concern about taxi services in Dublin. I understand a report will be available in the next few months. I share the Senators' concern about this matter. When the report is published, I will provide time for a debate on it.
Senator Coogan mentioned radon gas. The west is at risk from this gas, but the midlands, and particularly the area I come from, has the highest level in the country.
That explains it.
I will be delighted to facilitate Senator Coogan with a debate on that matter.
Some of the issues Senator Coghlan raises on the Order of Business at every sitting are matters for the tribunals. I am doing all I can to ascertain the information the Senator requires. That information is very sensitive, but as soon as I have it the Senator will receive it within an hour. Senator McGowan requested a debate on high telephone costs, and we will have that debate early in the next session. Senator Chambers expressed serious concerns about rail links. The Senator will be pleased to hear that the Minister for Public Enterprise has called for an inquiry into this problem.
Senator Cosgrave has been very patient in relation to the matter he raised and I take a serious view of the difficulties he, his party and other Members are experiencing. It is not my fault, nor is it the fault of the Leader of any group or the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. We have done everything in our power to bring this issue to the attention of those in charge of the various Departments with responsibility for this matter, and we have had many meetings to deal with it. However, the House is to deal with two Bills today, one of which must conclude in order to be returned to the Dáil. Bearing that in mind, statements from party leaders regarding Members' facilities will be taken at the conclusion of today's business. Those statements will be 15 minutes in length. However, if other Members wish to speak on this matter we can have those statements tomorrow. We do not know when business will conclude today, as at least 15 Senators have indicated they wish to speak on the second Bill before the House. I will make time available to Members within reason. Legislation must be processed.
Senator Norris mentioned the Litter Bill. I will make inquiries into this matter and contact him.
Can the Leader clarify his suggestion? Does he propose that the Leader of each group speak for 15 minutes on accommodation and facilities at the conclusion of business?
Each Leader or spokesperson will have 15 minutes.
The Independent group does not have a Leader, but we will have a spokesperson.
The proposal to discuss this matter perhaps at midnight is not acceptable. In deference to the Leader's recognition of how serious the matter is, I will withdraw the amendment today. However, we will submit it tomorrow at the beginning of the day's business.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Order of Business agreed to.